• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

117 Excellent

About DeadShotKeen

  1. Just done an internet search and found this: ​So looks like they're locked til 2018 based on the date there.
  2. Pretty much, yes. There's nothing wrong with a side like Leigh being a local concern with about 3-5K fans. In fact, that's very valuable. What isn't sensible is asking them to try to become an elite side with the 12K+ fans needed to maintain that (and especially when many additional fans would just be drawn from Wigan's current fanbase). That's the kind of old-fashioned thinking that has got us where we are and will ensure that Leigh become another financial basket case just like the rest.
  3. Why would the rest be left to wither? They feed into the higher echelons (player progression, links with elite sides etc.) via lower level structures that better suit their needs. If you're lucky enough to live in an area with a lower level side on your doorstep and an elite level side also serving your area then you have the best of both worlds. What doesn't help anyone is asking any small side to fulfil those dual roles. They simply cannot.
  4. I was going to mention that (but my post was quite long enough!) Emotions were clearly running high at that time and NRL clearly wanted to send the right message of support but you're right that legally that might now come back to haunt NRL (and McLean by association).
  5. It was a P&R system. Not secure and not progressive. Furthermore, London's protection from relegation fuelled and exacerbated animosity in the heartlands. It was a disastrous hotch potch.
  6. Precisely. Now remind me....was that directed for or against my argument that fans will change teams to fit the landscape? It sounds like a cast iron message of support to me. On the other hand, clearly many fans are not interested in supporting little teams with little prospect of success (and who can blame them?). Whether you like it or not, this is "politics".
  7. Leicester was a big story the world over. I certainly don't purport to speak for all North Americans but there is little clamour over there for tiered leagues - the concept of all teams having "franchise players" and general parity is well embedded. I was speaking mainly about the owners of their teams, who generally wouldn't have much regard for a P&R system I don't think. They don't need an instant return on their investment (most don't even get that in the long-run) but they do want to walk straight into the sun along with the security that a franchised league offers. There is an irony in the most brutal neo-liberal country in the world favouring pro sports leagues that are equitable and balanced, whilst here in the UK where we're very proud of our working class heritage we prefer "Thatcherite" systems built along capitalist lines and thus exposed to the worst elements of capitalism (boom and bust, haves and have nots etc.) It's an irony lost on most people, who generally only see what has been before. A bit of Marxist "dialectical materialism" would do RL heartland fans in particular the power of good.
  8. This could get deep and political but I'm a die hard (and active) socialist so I could never support any "Thatcherite" system of haves and have nots such as any of our pro sports leagues. I still love rugby league. I don't care what you say. All love (apart from that of children they say, although I wouldn't know) is conditional I guess. Love of a specific team over and above the sport they play is IMHO a little pathological and yes, sectarian (which is not compatible with socialism for one thing). That's just my opinion.
  9. I tend to agree with roughyedspud's analysis. My own view of the appalling incident - and only McKinnon himself will know if this is true or not - is that he felt contact to his feet and misguidedly tried to flip himself over to win a pen. McLean's hand no sooner touches his foot than it's removed and poor McKinnon is left with life-changing results from a bad (and brave, perhaps foolish depending on where you stand) decision made in a split second. It was truly horrifying and when I saw the replay from the opposite side (I was watching the game "as live" the following night without knowing the score or any of the events) my instant reaction was that the lad must surely be paralysed. I haven't seen it again (I had to look away even from the still shot that did the rounds in the press in the following days) and have no desire to ever see it again so I'm relying on my single viewing once in real time there and admit I may be wrong. But I think a few things came together - a side being well beaten, a brave lad taking a tough hit up, another lad getting the wrong side and thinking about a flip (then thinking better of it) and the brave lad misreading the other lad and seeing an opportunity to get his side back in the game, with fateful results. Just the worst possible set of circumstances and McKinnon is so unlucky, bad decision or not. The bottom line is that whatever else we say RL is a dangerous sport and these lads take their lives in their hands in so many ways in order to entertain us (and of course to earn themselves a good living but still). I thus think that Cam Smith was in many ways correct with his assessment. I was a little shocked by his comment given the gravity of the situation but I half wonder if he wasn't just trying to introduce a little "normalisation" into the situation....almost like "If I say something of a throwaway, semi-competitive nature will it just make this a normal injury in a tough combat sport like any other?" I certainly don't think there was any malice in it and Smith is the last RL player I would ever throw mud at. That bit's by the by anyway in this analysis but I think it's worth reinforcing. I do recall the widespread defence of McLean when he got his long ban and I supported it 100%. It sounds insensitive to say maybe given the gravity of McKinnon's injuries but I really do feel for the lad. I don't think he's a remotely dirty player - it was just the horrible coming together of a few ingredients in a 3 man tackle and it could have happened to anyone. As many said at the time, let's not destroy the careers of 2 young lads. McLean's progression seems to have slowed a bit since the incident but he had a good year last year. He deserves the continued support of the RL world in what will now be a tough time for him. I don't think McKinnon is right to go after NRL but then who the hell am I to say that? I wish him all the best whatever he does; he's a true warrior. This is the first I'd heard that he won't walk again, which is really sad - I had followed his progress to some extent for a year or so and saw that he was upright at the Dally Ms (last year maybe?) but then like all of these things you tend to forget don't you? I think it was perhaps hope against hope that he would walk again but I'm glad he seems to look in otherwise good nick in the shots on that piece. I don't really know what would constitute a positive outcome for all involved here but let's just pray that those freakish set of circumstances never come together again and that McKinnon is still able to live an active and rewarding life. His comments and actions since the accident certainly suggest so. I agree with Wayne Bennett's comment in the immediate aftermath: "He is an outstanding young man".
  10. Then it sounds like you (and the previous poster to you) have a stronger affinity to your club than to the sport of rugby league as a whole. That is a little sad and pretty much the definition of sectarianism. I love RL firstly and foremostly. I'd watch any anywhere (as long as it's in a sensible and sustainable structure).
  11. They didn't because it was a P&R system. Yeah London were exempt from relegation for a period. That's not the same as a proper franchised league. It was half-cocked.
  12. Where that falls down is that I said "fund it properly and within a secure elite structure". These clearly didn't happen with London. If they had we would now be reaping the benefits.
  13. Salford still exist, which they wouldn't without Koukash. That seems a pretty decent result to me. What's most regrettable for me is that Koukash also favours a P&R system. Had he brought pressure to bear re: licensing on the likes of Hudgell, Davy, O'Connor etc. then the sport would likely be in a much healthier state right now and Toronto straight into SL a much easier fit. One of the problems with these dudes is that they're from a cut throat capitalist background and thus favour the "survival of the fittest" ethos. Someone needs to point them towards the very astute comment of the Cleveland Browns owner way back in 1955 (I think) that summed up the then fledgling NFL: "We are 30 fatcat Republicans voting socialist".
  14. And this is divorced from the introverted move to return to P&R and abandon London as an elite club in 2013 then is it? Somewhat cart before horse good sir.
  15. You don't if you don't shut down Wakey but instead form a merged team of Wakey/Cas/Fev. By definition that would draw fans away from Leeds, namely those whose nearest side is 1 of those 3 but who are turned off by the large gulf in playing resources, crowd, facilities etc. between them and Leeds. The partisans on here would have us believe these people don't exist (and furthermore put forward said people's non engagement in these threads as some kind of proof). Common sense, however, as well as an analysis of the partisans' obvious vested interests tells anyone that they are wrong and that these people most likely exist in fairly large number.